lusterniafandomcom-20200216-history
Report 1520
Report #1520 Skillset: Cavalier Skill: Guard Org: Ur'Guard Status: Completed Nov 2016 Furies' Decision: Solution 1 - cooldown. Problem: Problem: The Cavalier skill Guard is quite useful and fitting thematically for the skillset, but there are some issues with it. It provides a free wounding strike without effort from the Guarding Warrior (albiet to a random bodypart out of 7 potential spots) for full wound application. It can hit more than once per enemy combo, so classes such as monks are excessively impacted by this. 0 R: 0 Solution #1: Change guard self to have a 15s cooldown minimum. Additionally add a line to show the attack is from guard "As you attack $person they 0 R: 0 Solution #2: Reducing wounds caused by rataliatory strike by half (6 instead of 12) 0 R: 0 Solution #3: Removing wounds from the retaliatory strike but retain current proc rate for an additional damage swing with venom application. Player Comments: ---on 11/13 @ 04:00 writes: Note there is no real issue with Guard Other that any have noted at this time. Targets protected causing the skill to proc, result in a random retaliatory strike onto the attacker on some random bodypart (one of 7 potential points), when said attacker is more than likely not the target of the Cavalier/Warrior doing the protecting in question. Hardly a game changer there. Guard Self however has some issues with allowing for unfair bonus wounding on part of the Cavalier not shared by any other specialty of Warrior, and has those small buggy issues mentioned above to contend with as well. Hence the need for this report, suggestions for other fixes are more than welcome also. ---on 11/13 @ 04:14 writes: Preference for Solution 3. Guard self adds a ton of wounds 1v1, but in groups it's much less powerful, even with the increased proc rate due to various factors. ---on 11/13 @ 07:38 writes: I support solution 3. I haven't seen or heard of any issues with guard other either but have seen first hand how effective it is 1v1. I would also request that guard be given a unique message of some sort. Currently there is no great way to differentiate a normal strike and a guard proc (at least when I've seen guard self proc), the only way to tell is if the guard message happens to be in the middle of other attacks but that's costly to interpret and prone to error. ---on 11/13 @ 07:51 writes: Bear in mind that as it is, unless the Guard strike happens to hit one of the particular bodyparts required for their insta (Chest AND Gut AND the target impaled, one of the few specs requiring two Critically wounded locations whereas others need only one at Crit, even AL need just one at Crit and two at Heavy), the wounds provided really don't do much effectively for the kill method at all. Maul, the other kill method other than Skewer described above, is based on limbs being broken and two mangled...which again requires sufficient wounds on the targets limbs to ensure two broken limbs and two mangled before that method can be utilized. Overall, while Cavalier has a slightly greater capability to add 'free' wounds with the Guard ability as is, they also DO require significantly more Wounds applied than any other spec to pull off their kill. So if Guard is removed because it's adding wounds too fast, than those other kill methods may also need to be tweaked to be less strenuous in requirement to maintain balance. Which may be preferred since that brings the method of wounds applied back into the Cavalier's sole control rather than random chance from free wounds applied to a 1/7 random bodypart, with a roughly 1/5 chance of being hit to retaliate probability. No one really likes RNG after all, and was why Warriors got Overhauled in the first place. ---on 11/14 @ 04:11 writes: Suggestions made to me for replaced Solutions, changing it so the hit rate is only once per 30s, reducing wounds applied to half wounds instead of a full hit, or removing wounds but leaving the hit/venom, rather than just blindly removing the skill entirely ---on 11/14 @ 05:08 writes: Solution 1 seems fair. ---on 11/14 @ 05:09 writes: With the new suggestions I support solution 1. ---on 11/14 @ 20:21 writes: New Solution 1 seems fine, this both reduces the power level and rng aspect, while keeping the flavour. ---on 11/16 @ 12:41 writes: I think solution 3 would be alright, I can also get behind solution 1. ---on 11/19 @ 06:53 writes: Solution 1